Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The early priests in the RCC were married-----------the change to celibacy came in the 11th century.
Paul was big on celibacy in his writings so I assume this influenced church leaders to only choose candidates for priesthood that wanted celibacy. No one is forced to be celibate and marriage is allowed in many other different rites of Catholicism.
Absolutely incorrect. Paul detailed the requirements for bishops and deacons (priests) and one requirement to be "a man of one wife."
That curious wording suggests that polygamy was not uncommon among First Century Christians.
The early priests in the RCC were married-----------the change to celibacy came in the 11th century.
Paul was big on celibacy in his writings so I assume this influenced church leaders to only choose candidates for priesthood that wanted celibacy. No one is forced to be celibate and marriage is allowed in many other different rites of Catholicism.
So potential priests had the choice: Be celibate or never become a priest.
1 Timothy 4
1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
Please cite scripture where Paul was "big on celibacy". I am aware of none.
I can't. Read my earlier posts in this thread and see I never promoted the idea of celibacy.
/Edit I must add that "a man of one wife." sounds odd to me because in the early days several women had high ranking positions in church.
Jesus, our High Priest, wasn't married.
I can't. Read my earlier posts in this thread and see I never promoted the idea of celibacy.
/Edit I must add that "a man of one wife." sounds odd to me because in the early days several women had high ranking positions in church.
Jesus, our High Priest, wasn't married.
The women mentioned (Priscilla, Lydia, etc.) in the New Testament church are not described as having any "rank". Peter had a wife and the RCC claims him as their first Pope!
Please cite scripture where Paul was "big on celibacy". I am aware of none.
I Corinthians 7
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: "It is well for a man not to touch a woman." But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. This I say by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind.
To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.
(I Corinthians 7:1-9, NRSV)
Paul writes to members of the church regarding sexuality, marriage, celibacy during marriage by agreement, and what he feels is the best state of things: remaining celibate and unmarried. He admits that he allows them to be married as "a concession", and that this is not how he thinks it should be. He gives them this concession, as I wrote in my post above, only if they are unable to resist the fleshly sexual passion.
Remember, Paul is dealing with the people of Corinth in this letter, who had a familiar saying "All is lawful". Judging from the rest of the letter, they were not your typical Christians heh heh! He had a lot of work to do with them.
Paul then states that he wished people would remain as they were when they were "called" - unmarried if unmarried, married if married (vs. 17-24) "In whatever condition you were called, brothers, there remain with God."
In vs. 25-40 he extolls the virtues of remaining a virgin, and speaks of the end-times and how marriage is not a good thing, for "those who marry will experience distress in this life, and I would spare you that. I mean, brothers, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none...." (vs. 28-29) Another call to remining celibate during marriage.
But anyways, there is your reference. I would say that's a good sign that Paul is relatively "big" on celibacy, at least during the time in which they expected the return of Jesus.
Though the dangers of excessive alcohol abuse are mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, it also encourages the drinking of wine to make one merry; strong drink is frowned upon, if done excessivley - so perhaps we have a difference between "wine" and "[strong] liquor" here. The Book of Proverbs contains many comments on it.
Jesus, having come from a Jewish background, would have been following traditional Jewish customs concerning alcohol. AS the poster above me pointed out - would Jesus have done something he didn't personally feel was acceptable spiritually?
It seems to me that much of the hullaballoo is from conservatives who use the phrase "your body is the temple" to prohibit anything they deem too pleasurable, or wordly. Too much Paul, not enough Jesus? Paul seemed to enjoy that "thorn" in his side (whatever it was), and his bachelor status - and many people have been paying his price ever since heh heh.
How about James, the brother of Jesus?
James 4
4 You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
Nothing wrong with drinking wine. As in everything we do, practice moderation.
God did require a tithe of the wine in the Old Testament. If you read up on tithing, you will find that tithers were to consume the tithe themselves, share it with the widows and orphans, and not to forget the priests. This then indicates a consumption of the tithed wine. There will also be wine in Heaven. At the Last Supper, Jesus said that He would drink it again in God's Kingdom. I try to imagine the Wedding Banquet of the Lamb of God when He offers a toast to God's glory and the Baptists all say "We don't drink wine".
In the New testament:
1 Corinthians 11:25
Quote:
In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
The apostles did it every time they met to remember Jesus. Some fundamentalist have never done this even though it is on the bible. Catholics do it every single time as per the bible.
4 You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
Nothing wrong with drinking wine. As in everything we do, practice moderation.
Yes, good quote.
James was at variance with much of what Paul said, as a side-note. As the conflict over circumcision showed, the early church writers were sometimes at odds with one another. James, being the brother of Jesus presumably, had a status and following that led him to be a powerful figure in the 1st Century.
I have no problem with drinking wine or alcohol, as long as it is in moderation. I just watched a loved one spend almost a year drinking immoderately, only to help them quit and cut back to one glass of wine a night and then watch them turn yellow 6 months later (jaundice). A trip to the emergency room determined that the damage had been done, though, and the single glass of wine (following the initial damage) was slowly poisoning the liver every night. This was a healthy person only 30 years old who had been drinking heavily for about 7-8 months. I was shocked. I'm still dealing with the health issues that have accrued since then. She was lucky - she has a chance to heal her liver. Many are not.
The above is a simple appeal to reason concerning immoderation. As you say, moderation is the way to go - whether the issue at stake is one's soul or health!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
